FNSFood and Nutrition Sciences2157-944XScientific Research Publishing10.4236/fns.2015.613129FNS-60690ArticlesBiomedical&Life Sciences Chemical, Nutritional and Organoleptical Characteristics of Orange-Based Formulated Low-Calorie Jams afeekM. Abolila1HassanBarakat1*HassanA. El-Tanahy1HamdyA. El-Mansy1Food Technology Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Benha University, Banha, Egypt* E-mail:hassan.barakat@fagr.bu.edu.eg(HB);0810201506131229124429 July 2015accepted 25 October 28 October 2015© Copyright 2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. 2014This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Twelve low-calorie orange-based formulated jams were prepared mainly from orange, pumpkin and papaya, and then sweetened using fructose (F), stevioside (St) and sucralose (Su). The nutritional value of formulated jams was estimated after the approximate chemical composition and total soluble solid have been determined. The effect of storage on total phenolic compounds, antioxidant capacity, carotenoids content and vitamin C was investigated. Organoleptical attributes of prepared low-calorie jams were done as well. Results indicated that the nutritive value [kcal 100 g –1 fw] ranged from 88.10 ± 0.60 to 164.34 ± 0.41; total phenol content (TPC, mg GAE 100 g –1 fw] ranged from 188.52 ± 2.45 to 411.79 ± 3.3; the antioxidant capacity (μmol TE g –1 fw) ranged from 14.57 ± 0.86 to 32.39 ± 1.19; total carotenoids [mg 100 g –1 fw] ranged from 115.20 ± 5.66 to 204.33 ± 4.21; vitamin C [mg 100 g fw] ranged from 8.94 ± 1.07 to 28.77 ± 4.46; total soluble solids [Brix] ranged from 22.53 ± 0.05 to 43.37 ± 0.13. Jams storage for a period of 12 months at room temperature led to a decrease in vitamin C content, TPC, antioxidant capacity, while total soluble solids (TSS) and carotenoids increased during storage. The results of organoleptical attributes showed that the formulas O11, O1 had the highest score of color and odor respectively while O7 recorded maximum score for taste, texture and bitterness respectively. Statistical analysis showed that storage intervals and treatments had a significant ( p < 0.05) effect on sensory quality of diet jam. The organoleptical characteristics were affected with the extension of shelf-life. Addition of stevioside and sucralose to formulate the low-calorie jam increased total phenol and antioxidant capacity, improved color, taste and produced targeted low-calorie jams. The use of sweeteners such as fructose, sucralose and stevioside in the manufacture of orange diet jam was shown to be satisfactory, resulting in low-calorie jams, improved the quality and could be produced commercially.

Low-Calorie Jam Chemical Nutritional Organoleptical Characteristics1. Introduction

Recently, health concerns associated with high sugar intake include excessive calorie consumption and related diseases are considered as crucial issues for many foods organizations [1] . Several organizations recommend consumption of fruits and vegetables as well as reduce total calories intake [2] - [4] . The growing concern with health and higher incidence of obesity, metabolic syndrome and diabetes has resulted in an increase in interest of low-calorie food consumption [5] [6] . In this context, consumption of low calories and light products which are indicated for peoples with diabetic or other medical restrictions, including obesity was increased [7] as well as for aesthetics and health concerned peoples. With increasing of consumer interest in reducing sugar intake, food products made with sweeteners rather than sugar have become more popular and depleted quickly with high market share [8] .

Surely, the production of low-calorie products must comprise low-calorie raw materials and low-calorie sweeteners [9] . To meet the recommended reduction of calories, several foods have been introduced into the market as low-calorie products incorporating natural and/or artificial sweeteners. Low-calorie sweeteners (LCSs) are added to many foods and beverages, for reducing total calories, while maintaining palatability [10] . LCSs have only begun to develop over the past 30 years, concomitant with the increase in obesity and type 2 diabetes, which led to an increased interest in methods of losing weight or maintaining weight loss [11] [12] . The LCSs currently licensed for use in many countries [13] . The varying chemical properties of each LCS mean that they are suited to diverse uses and wide applications could be presented [12] . Typically, the energy difference between regular and LCS-sweetened products is more pronounced in beverages, processed fruits and vegetables more than foods [14] [15] .

Interestingly, sucralose is the only commercial sweetener derived from sucrose and is an intense sweetener made by selective substitution of the hydroxyl groups of sucrose with chlorine [16] . It can be used in cooking and baking and in soft drinks, tea, coffee and chilled desserts. Sucralose is non-caloric, noncariogenic and has no effect on blood glucose or insulin levels. It has a taste profile very close to sucrose, presenting very low level of bitterness and sourness. The use of sucralose, one of the newest sweeteners of high sweetening power, has been gradually increasing [17] - [21] .

Stevia is a natural sweetener, extracted from leaves of the plant (Stevia rebaudiana Bert.), and produces diterpene glycosides that are low-calorie sweeteners. Stevia extracts, besides having therapeutic properties, contain a high level of sweetening compounds, known as steviol glycosides [22] [23] . Stevia contains intensely sweet substances that are 250 to 300 times sweeter than sugar [24] . Steviol glycosides are safe (GRAS) by the FDA. Steviol glycosides can be particularly beneficial to those suffering from obesity, diabetes mellitus, heart disease and dental caries [25] . Production of low-calorie jams could be an important issue for many people groups who suffer from obesity, diabetics, sugar allergic, and dental decay. In addition, it will be a satisfaction to consumers, who maintain their health or for weight management programs.

Nowadays the dietary awareness of consumers has led to the growth of health food industry, and thus alternative jams containing artificial sweeteners should be available. According to the Egyptian specification 2005, there are two kinds of low-calorie jams: 1) contain not less than 200 calorie per 100 gm and 2) should not be less than 100 calorie per 100 gm with shelf-life stability for one year. Recently, Muhammad et al. [26] , Kopjar et al. [27] , Tamer et al. [28] , Basu et al. [29] , Gao et al. [30] , Kerdsup et al. [31] , Youssef et al. [32] , Teangpook et al. [33] , Levaj et al. [34] investigated many jams formulas sweetened with different LCSs and approved that there are no drastic effects on prepared jam characteristics.

Therefore, the current work is aimed at determining the chemical and nutritional properties of the prepared low-calorie jams incorporated with low-calorie sweeteners compared with the common sweetened jams. The microbiological characteristics of prepared low-calorie jams and sensory attractiveness of prepared low-calorie jams are assessed. Moreover, the study of the effect of storage period on chemical and nutritional properties, microbiological and sensory characteristics of low-calorie jams was investigated.

2. Materials and Methods2.1. Fresh Fruits

The raw materials used for preparing low calories jams are: orange (Citrus sinensis), fully mature Egyptian baladi orange fruits and pumpkin (Cucurbita maxima) obtained from local market at Qaliuobia Governorate, Egypt. Papaya fruits (Carica papaya L. cv. Sunrise Solo), 750 g to 1750 g/each were obtained from farm of Faculty of Agriculture, Moshtohor Benha Univ., Egypt. The fruit surface was treated by H2O2 5% as disinfectant then ripened at room temperature for 3 - 4 days.

2.2. Fixed Ingredients

Fructose was obtained from the National Company for Maize Products, 10th Ramadan city, A1, Egypt. LM pectin (E 440 (a)―LM 104 AS-FS Pectin, Food grade, Denemark), potassium sorbate (E 202―Food grade, China), citric acid (E 330―Food grade, China), calcium lactate (E 327―Food grade, Belgum), sodium benzoate (E 211―Food grade, China) were obtained from Hero factory for jams and beverages manufacturing, Tersa, Qaluiobia, Egypt. Stevioside and sucralose (Fineprint company) imported by Rebat company for food stuffs trade, Egypt.

2.3. Fruits Preparation

Orange fruits were washed, capsules were removed and external layer had been removed using the carborandum then cut into halves and extracted. Afterword, extracted juice sterilized at 90˚C for 5 min then cooled down to 45˚C. Exactly 1 kg was filled in a polyethylene bag and sealed after removing the air then kept under −20˚C. Peel’s halves were cut by sharp knife into small slices then boiled into hot water 100˚C for 1 h, drained, cooled down, filled in a polyethylene bag then kept under −20˚C. Papaya fruit were washed, peeled, cut into small cubic and homogenized by kitchen machine grounder (SIEMENS, type CNCM11ST Germany). Exactly, 1 kg was filled in a polyethylene bag, sealed then kept under −20˚C. Pumpkin fruits were washed, peeled, cut into small cubes, steam blanched for 10 min, cooled down, homogenized by kitchen machine grounder, filled in a polyethylene bag, sealed then kept under −20˚C.

2.3.1. Formulation of Low-Calorie Jams

Many preliminary experiments have been done for selecting the best fruits and sweeteners portions. Twelve jam formulas were prepared according to Table 1.

Low calories orange-based formulated jams
Formula No.Ingredients
Fruits puree (%)Sweeteners (%)Additives (%)
OrangePumpkinPapayaFructoseSucraloseSteviosidePectine LMCitric acidCa lactateNa benzoateK sorbate
O1100--100--0.750.350.150.010.06
O2100--7516.58.500.90.350.150.010.06
O3100--5033.516.500.90.350.150.010.06
O4100--25502510.350.150.010.06
O57525-100--0.750.350.150.010.06
O67525-7516.58.500.90.350.150.010.06
O77525-5033.516.500.90.350.150.010.06
O87525-25502510.350.150.010.06
O975-25100--0.750.370.150.010.06
O1075-257516.58.500.90.370.150.010.06
O1175-255033.516.500.90.370.150.010.06
O1275-2525502510.370.150.010.06
2.3.2. Procedure

Combinations of fruit puree were heated until boiling, LMP (104 AS-FS) food grade Pectin (E 440a), Denmark was added as 0.75% - 1% [35] to fruits mix and allowed to boil for 10 min until all pectin dissolved. Sucralose, fructose, and stevioside were added followed by calcium lactate (0.15%). The mixture was boiled until desired concentration. Finally, citric acid, sodium benzoate and potassium sorbate (0.06%) were added, stirred for 1 min, and hot-filed in sterile jars. After 24 h, formulated jams were subjected to whole analysis.

2.3.3. Analytical Methods

Nutritional value: The nutritional value of different fresh and fried vegetarian diets was calculated basically on the crude protein, lipids and carbohydrates data according to [36] .

Ascorbic acid determination: Ascorbic acid determination using the 2,6-dichlorophenol indophenol dye by titration method according to [36] .

Determination of carotenoids: Carotenoids were determined in the acetonic extract and expressed as mg 100 g−1 fw according to [37]

Determination of total phenolic compounds: After extraction of total phenolic compound, concentration of TPC was determined by Folin-Ciocalteau method. After 1 h at ambient temperature, the absorbance was measured at 765 nm and The TPC was expressed as milligram gallic acid equivalents per gram sample (mg GAE 100 g−1 fw) according to [38] .

2.3.4. Determination of Radical DPPH-Scavenging Activity

Antioxidant activity was measured spectrophotometrically using the 2,2-diphenylpicrylhy-drazyl (DPPH) radical. According to this method, extracted samples, which were made to react with the radical solution and rest for 30 minutes at room temperature, were measured for absorbance at 517 nm, and the inhibition percentage of DPPH free radical was calculated [39] .

2.3.5. Organoleptical Attributes

Organoleptical attributes of the different formulas was carried out. Forty panelists of the staff members and students from the Food Science Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Benha University, in the age range of 20 to 57 years were asked to evaluate the prepared jams towards color, taste, odor, texture, and bitterness. A 7-point hedonic scale (7 being like extremely, 4 like accepted and 1 dislike extremely) was used. Results were subjected to analysis of variance and average of the mean values of the aforementioned attributes and their standard error were calculated according to Wilson et al. [40] .

2.3.6. Statistical Analysis

The statistical analysis was carried out using SPSS program (ver. 19) with multi-function utility regarding to the experimental design under significance level of 0.05 for the whole results and multiple comparisons were carried out applying LSD with Duncan according to Steel et al. [41] .

3. Results and Discussion3.1. Nutritive Value of Prepared Jams

Twelve low calorie orange-based formulated jams were prepared mainly from orange, pumpkin and papaya then sweetened using fructose (F), stevioside (St) and sucralose (Su) as mentioned in Table 1. In order to calculate the actual nutritional value of prepared jams, the proximate chemical composition was determined (data not presented). Comparing between mean of storage period for all formulas the nutritive value ranged from 88.10 ± 0.60 in O8 to 164.34 ± 0.41 kcal 100 g−1 fw in O9 (Table 2). The optimum value observed in O9 formula with (100:0, F:St + Su) while the minimum value observed in O8 formula with (25:75, F:St + Su). Data indicated that the formulas O4, O8 and O12 with (25:75) ratio meet the required specifications of 2005’s Egyptian standards for diet jam which instruct that low calorie must be less than 100 kcal 100 g−1 jam. Results indicated that there is a significant difference among all formulas regarding the different ratios of fructose replacement by sweeteners. These results are in agreement with Salvador et al. [42] who demonstrated that caloric value of the low calorie yacon jams was ranged from 116.4 to 140.0 kcal 100 g−1. The orange and orange mixed jams reduced caloric value and can be considered as light or “low calorie” products. The high sweetening ability of the sugars present

Nutritional value (kcal 100 g<sup>−1</sup> fw) of orange-based formulated low calories jams sweetened with fructose, stev- ioside and sucralose during 12 months of storage (mean ± SD)
Fruit typeSweetener formulaStorage period (month)Mean of storage periodMean of fruit type
036912
OrangeO1167 ± 0.04163.95 ± 0.15165.07 ± 0.24164.03 ± 0.07161.21 ± 0.14164.25 ± 0.20i131.94 ± 2.34b
O2145.82 ± 0.21152.32 ± 0.13147.5 ± 0.28141.63 ± 0.23143.81 ± 0.21146.21 ± 0.36g
O3119.72 ± 0.29130.9 ± 0.54121.79 ± 0.07125.61 ± 0.27118.96 ± 0.15123.40 ± 0.49e
O488.18 ± 095.59 ± 0.5796.6 ± 0.196.26 ± 0.1592.94 ± 0.2793.92 ± 0.42b
75% orange/ 25% pumpkinO5150.88 ± 0.27156.35 ± 0.39153.29 ± 0.07155.69 ± 0.14153.43 ± 0.05153.93 ± 0.25h124.35 ± 2.31a
O6139.18 ± 0.3146.41 ± 0.4134.93 ± 0.25133.36 ± 0.2141.38 ± 0.3139.05 ± 0.48f
O7102.94 ± 0.23125.32 ± 0.4115.38 ± 0.2118.02 ± 0.2119.85 ± 0.47116.30 ± 0.76d
O881.55 ± 0.2994.92 ± 0.187.44 ± 0.2893.09 ± 0.2583.5 ± 0.0588.10 ± 0.60a
75% orange/ 25% papayaO9166.66 ± 0.14170.57 ± 0.13160.73 ± 0.37157.36 ± 0.02166.4 ± 0.01164.34 ± 0.41i132.6 ± 2.26b
O10132.94 ± 0.23154.08 ± 0.36146.76 ± 0.06149.86 ± 0.09144.67 ± 0.19145.66 ± 0.64g
O11113 ± 0.3130.53 ± 0.51119.29 ± 0.15126.09 ± 0.16125.4 ± 0.17122.86 ± 0.62e
O1292.08 ± 0.09106.91 ± 0.1694.99 ± 0.2294.8 ± 0.0998.9 ± 0.6897.54 ± 0.61c
Mean of total storage period125.00 ± 2.61A135.65 ± 2.19C128.65 ± 2.29B129.65 ± 2.16B129.21 ± 2.33B
Ratio of (fructose:sweeteners)O (1,5,9) (100/0)O (2,6,10) (75/25)O (3,7,11) (50/50)O (4,8,12) (25/75)
Mean of sweetener formula160.84 ± 0.49D143.64 ± 0.57C120.85 ± 0.69B93.18 ± 0.68A
LSD at 0.05Storage (S)Fruit (F)Sweetener (T)S*FS*TF*TS*F*T
1.341.201.202.332.692.084.65

a, b & c: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means, within the same column have the same superscript letter. n = 3. A, B & C: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means for the same attribute within the same row have the same superscript letter.

in orange, mainly fructose [43] , contributed to the preparation of a jam with low addition of sucrose and therefore low content of calories occurred. Comparing between mean of total storage period, results indicated that increasing in nutritive value during storage period. The cause of increasing nutritive value may be due to increasing the soluble carbohydrates during storage. Mean of sweetener formula indicated that maximum nutritive value was 160.84 ± 0.49 kcal 100 g−1 fw obtained by (100:0) while minimum value was 93.18 ± 0.68 kcal 100 g−1 fw obtained by (25:75) and there is a significant difference between all ratios. Yuyama et al. [44] found reduction in the caloric value ranged from 25.9% to 37.9% in jambolão fruit jams using four types of sweeteners individually or in combination (saccharin, cyclamate, acesulfame and St). Moreover, [45] [46] reported that stevioside give low calories.

3.2. Total Phenolic Compounds and Antioxidant Capacity

Phenolics are naturally occurring compounds widely distributed in the plant kingdom and beneficial components of human daily diet Le et al. [47] . Presented data in Table 3, indicated that orange jams had the highest score for total phenol compounds ( TPC) which was311.24 ± 4.95 mg GAE 100 g−1 followed by 284.18 ± 5.82 mg GAE 100 g−1 in OY jams while minimum score was 252.19 ± 4.63 mg GAE 100 g− 1 in OK jams. Tamer et al. [28] reported that pumpkin dessert containing 111.64 ± 1.16 to 234.14 ± 7.47 mg GAE 100 g−1. Comparing between mean of storage period after 12 month the results indicated that maximum TPC was 411.79 ± 3.31 mg GAE 100 g−1 in O4 while minimum total phenol was 188.52 ± 2.45 mg GAE 100 g−1 in O9. The results illustrated that the TPC increased with decreasing the fructose. These results are in agreement with Istratii et al. [48] who found TPC in goji fruits jam and jelly was 351 ± 7.25 mg GAE 100 g−1. Comparing between mean of total storage period, results indicated that TPC decreased from 274.4 ± 4.59 mg GAE 100 g−1 at zero time to 251.04 ± 4.94 mg GAE 100 g−1 after 9 months during storage at room temperature. These results are in agreement with [49] - [52]

Total phenol content (mg GAE 100 g<sup>−1</sup> fw) of orange-based formulated low calories jams sweetened with fructose, stevioside and sucralose during 12 months of storage (mean ± SD)
Fruit typeSweetener formulaStorage period (month)Mean of storage periodMean of fruit type
036912
OrangeO1221.71 ± 1.18180.8 ± 1.66306.88 ± 1.53229.5 ± 1.13214.41 ± 0.29230.66 ± 3.03ac311.24 ± 4.95c
O2282.94 ± 0.81275.27 ± 0.15297.53 ± 0.99245.35 ± 3.73263.3 ± 0.66272.88 ± 1.82cd
O3303 ± 0.48407.01 ± 6.61312.31 ± 0.65291.16 ± 3.47334.74 ± 0.85329.65 ± 3.87e
O4361.04 ± 0.46400.63 ± 2.43506.98 ± 1.93342.76 ± 0.85447.57 ± 0.86411.79 ± 3.31f
75% orange/ 25% pumpkinO5167.66 ± 1.13279.99 ± 1.08197.36 ± 1.76164.13 ± 1.18179.44 ± 0.56197.72 ± 3.31a252.19 ± 4.63a
O6270.37 ± 3.8283.68 ± 6.36292.68 ± 2.86191.73 ± 5.41189.83 ± 1.91245.66 ± 4.79c
O7269.76 ± 3.77288.35 ± 4.41284.72 ± 3.4227.34 ± 6.12232.78 ± 0.89260.59 ± 3.81cd
O8290.78 ± 6.61312.57 ± 2.13371.9 ± 2.21261.28 ± 5.35287.34 ± 1.25304.78 ± 4.01d
75% orange/ 25% papayaO9170.17 ± 3.04216.21 ± 1.22206.8 ± 2.76178.99 ± 3.05170.41 ± 0.45188.52 ± 2.45a284.18 ± 5.82b
O10279.75 ± 4.21299.91 ± 1.83256.03 ± 2.87224.45 ± 2.81261.89 ± 1.57264.41 ± 2.87cd
O11291.96 ± 2.54354.52 ± 4.38224.66 ± 1.45276.35 ± 4.18327.02 ± 2.07294.9 ± 3.82de
O12383.6 ± 2.46254.29 ± 2424.21 ± 1.23379.44 ± 2.22502.83 ± 6.5388.88 ± 5.28f
Mean of total storage period274.4 ± 4.59AB296.1 ± 4.86BC306.84 ± 5.31C251.04 ± 4.94A284.3 ± 6.43BC
Ratio of (fructose:sweeteners)O (1,5,9) (100/0)O (2,6,10) (75/25)O (3,7,11) (50/50)O (4,8,12) (25/75)
Mean of sweetener formula205.63 ± 3.16A260.98 ± 3.34B295.05 ± 4.10C368.48 ± 4.83D
LSD at 0.05 for:Storage (S)Fruit (F)Sweetener (T)S*FS*TF*TS*F*T
23.9621.4321.4341.5147.9337.1283.01

a, b & c: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means, within the same column have the same superscript letter. n = 3. A, B & C: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means for the same attribute within the same row have the same superscript letter.

whose indicated TPC decreasing during jam storage. Comparing between mean of sweetener formula the results indicated that TPC increased from 205.63 ± 3.16 mg GAE 100 g− 1 in ratio of (100:0) to 368.48 ± 4.83 mg GAE 100 g−1 in ratio of (25:75). These results are in agreement with Shukla et al. [53] who remarked increases in TPC due to addition of stevioside in prepared diet jam. Moreover, Tadhani et al. [54] indicated that stevia plant containing 25.18 mg gm−1 TPC in stevia leaves.

Data in Table 4, indicated that mean of antioxidantactivity in jam types was ranged from 20.48 ± 1.62 to 25.47 ± 1.63 μmol TE g−1. These results indicated that there is a significant difference among all jam types. Increasing of antioxidant activity in formulas O4, O8 and O12 may be due to increasing of stevioside content. Shukla et al. [53] reported that stevia plant used as a good source of antioxidant. Tadhani et al. [54] reported that stevia is containing 9.66 to 38.24 mg antioxidant. Comparing between mean of total storage period the results indicated that the highest antioxidant activity was 27.69 ± 1.11 μmol TE g−1 obtained at zero time while low antioxidant activity was 13.67 ± 1.17 μmol TE g−1 at the end of storage. This means that antioxidant activity decreased during storage for 12 month. There is a significant difference among all storage periods. These results were consistent with data reported previously [48] [49] [52] [55] - [59] . They demonstrated that the antioxidant activity of different berries significantly decreased after jam processing and storage period. This decrease can be attributed to the destruction of phytochemicals, phenolics compounds as well as L-ascorbic acid as a result of thermal treatment. Comparing between mean of sweetener formula the results indicated that highest antioxidant was 26.98 ± 1.57 μmol TE g−1 in ratio of (25:75) while low antioxidant activity was 17.32 ± 1.19 μmol TE g−1 in ratio of (100:0). These results may be due to addition of stevioside to diet jam which increasing antioxidant activity in prepared jams (Shukla et al. [53] ).

The presented data in Table 5, illustrated the carotenoids content prepared jams. Carotenoids content was ranged from 141.75 ± 4.51 mg 100 g−1 fw in OK to 155.86 ± 4.76 mg 100 g−1 fw in OY jams. The results observed

Antioxidant activity (μmol TE g<sup>−1</sup> fw) of orange-based formulated low calories jams sweetened with fructose, stevioside and sucralose during 12 months of storage (mean ± SD)
Fruit typeSweetener formulaStorage period (month)Mean of storage periodMean of fruit type
036912
OrangeO123.04 ± 0.1724.29 ± 0.0816.55 ± 0.5716.81 ± 0.6112.7 ± 0.1118.68 ± 1.09b25.47 ± 1.63c
O226.21 ± 0.1926.08 ± 0.1731.57 ± 0.4418.22 ± 0.4514.81 ± 0.0923.38 ± 1.32cd
O330.56 ± 0.3130.54 ± 0.1338.39 ± 0.5220.49 ± 0.3517.16 ± 0.3127.43 ± 1.54e
O439.15 ± 0.141.01 ± 0.1628.14 ± 0.5128.32 ± 0.4725.34 ± 0.332.39 ± 1.19f
75% orange/ 25% pumpkinO524.59 ± 0.1224.79 ± 0.116.83 ± 0.4316.69 ± 0.3910.74 ± 0.1918.73 ± 1.30b22.66 ± 1.57b
O626.42 ± 0.2226.63 ± 0.1831.75 ± 0.3418.19 ± 0.5110.66 ± 0.122.73 ± 1.63c
O732.22 ± 0.5827.53 ± 0.427.07 ± 219.13 ± 0.3611.84 ± 0.1623.56 ± 1.77cd
O828.99 ± 1.5425.48 ± 1.0629.4 ± 0.5827.84 ± 0.5316.39 ± 0.1125.62 ± 1.27d
75% orange/ 25% papayaO917.63 ± 0.316.65 ± 0.8214.51 ± 0.2914.7 ± 0.239.35 ± 0.0314.57 ± 0.86a20.48 ± 1.62a
O1024.28 ± 0.1522.65 ± 0.527.26 ± 0.1916.13 ± 0.3411.04 ± 0.0920.27 ± 1.38b
O1126.64 ± 0.1528.27 ± 0.132.23 ± 0.0320.07 ± 0.5813.59 ± 0.1624.16 ± 1.40cd
O1232.53 ± 0.4430.28 ± 0.2520.57 ± 0.6920.8 ± 0.7510.41 ± 0.2422.92 ± 1.77c
Mean of total storage period27.69 ± 1.11E27.02 ± 1.13D26.19 ± 1.54C19.78 ± 1.02B13.67 ± 1.17A
Ratio of (fructose:sweeteners)O (1,5,9) (100/0)O (2,6,10) (75/25)O (3,7,11) (50/50)O (4,8,12) (25/75)
Mean of sweetener formula17.32 ± 1.19A22.13 ± 1.45B25.05 ± 1.58C26.98 ± 1.57D
LSD at 0.05 for:Storage (S)Fruit (F)Sweetener (T)S*FS*TF*TS*F*T
1.161.041.042.022.331.804.03

a, b & c: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means, within the same column have the same superscript letter. n = 3. A, B & C: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means for the same attribute within the same row have the same superscript letter.

Carotenoids content (mg 100 g<sup>−1</sup> fw) of orange-based formulated low calories jams sweetened with fructose, stevioside and sucralose during 12 months of storage (mean ± SD)
Fruit typeSweetener formulaStorage period (month)Mean of storage periodMean of fruit type
036912
OrangeO1127.78 ± 2.9127.69 ± 2.92118.23 ± 2.32177.95 ± 5.85115.03 ± 0.94133.34 ± 3.72abc153.22 ± 5.80a
O2110.4 ± 2.62105.73 ± 2.58101.36 ± 2.6130.42 ± 6.52163.01 ± 3.08122.19 ± 3.91a
O3153.55 ± 2.25124.69 ± 1.07139.62 ± 1.25263.51 ± 2.48173.54 ± 2.74170.98 ± 4.29cde
O4157.52 ± 5.01130.37 ± 1.65179.94 ± 7.8797.43 ± 3.43366.61 ± 0.78186.38 ± 8.00de
75% orange/ 25% pumpkinO5135.4 ± 4.9787.38 ± 3.67157.57 ± 7.7376.22 ± 8.19119.42 ± 0.33115.20 ± 5.66a141.75 ± 4.51a
O6131.48 ± 1.67144.86 ± 0.22161.1 ± 2.394.96 ± 6.62122.96 ± 1.54131.07 ± 3.20abc
O7127.82 ± 1.44175.19 ± 2.7139.67 ± 0.88176.33 ± 3.44136.38 ± 3.09151.08 ± 2.78abcd
O8123.29 ± 1.71130.87 ± 1.47149.7 ± 3.19255.69 ± 5.9188.7 ± 1.37169.65 ± 4.95bcde
75% orange/ 25% papayaO9114.16 ± 1.38112.9 ± 1.35141.69 ± 1.67111.52 ± 1.77157.26 ± 0.81127.51 ± 2.08ab155.86 ± 4.76a
O1093.61 ± 1.82136.8 ± 1.41112.16 ± 0.9896.48 ± 9.13237.83 ± 3.09135.37 ± 5.85abc
O11143.03 ± 3.17157.69 ± 1.56104.56 ± 1.01175.35 ± 5.54200.56 ± 1.72156.24 ± 3.79abcd
O12210.06 ± 4.55208.72 ± 4.62204.74 ± 2.81189.32 ± 8.4208.79 ± 2.34204.33 ± 4.21e
Mean of total storage period135.68 ± 3.65A136.91 ± 3.39A142.53 ± 4.14A153.77 ± 6.87A182.51 ± 5.29B
Ratio of (fructose:sweeteners)O (1,5,9) (100/0)O (2,6,10) (75/25)O (3,7,11) (50/50)O (4,8,12) (25/75)
Mean of sweetener formula125.35 ± 3.99A129.54 ± 4.42A159.43 ± 3.68B186.78 ± 5.89C
LSD at 0.05 for:Storage (S)Fruit (F)Sweetener (T)S*FS*TF*TS*F*T
21.1218.8918.8936.5842.2432.7273.17

a, b & c: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means, within the same column have the same superscript letter. n = 3. A, B & C: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means for the same attribute within the same row have the same superscript letter.

that there is no significant difference among all of jam types. These results are in agreement with [28] [60] . Comparing between mean of total storage period the results indicated that higher carotenoids content was 182.51 ± 5.29 mg 100 g−1 fw at the end of storage period while lower carotenoids content was 135.68 ± 3.65 mg 100 g−1 fw at zero time. These results indicated that carotenoids may be released from the matrix during storage. These results are in agreement with Correa et al. [49] who observed that carotenoids increased from 36.66 ± 1.17 to 62.18 ± 1.48 mg 100 g−1 fw at day-1and day-90 in grape juice, respectively. Comparing between mean of sweetener formula, the results indicated that higher carotenoids content was 186.78 ± 5.89 mg 100 g−1 fw in ratio of (25:75) while lower carotenoids content was 125.35 ± 3.99 mg 100 g−1 fw in ratio of (100:0). The results indicated that there is no significant difference between the ratios (100:0) and (75:25) while there is a significant difference between (50:50) and (25:75) ratios.

3.3. Vitamin C and Total Soluble Solids Contents

Vitamin C is involved in protein metabolism, collagen synthesis and an important physiological antioxidant [61] . In Table 6, results indicated that there is a significant difference between jam types. The results demonstrated that vitamin C content recorded in OY jams was 22.04 ± 3.51 mg 100 g−1 followed by orange jams 11.42 ± 1.03 mg 100 g−1 fw while OK jams recorded 9.59 ± 1.03 mg 100 g−1 fw. The difference of vitamin C content in formulas may be due to the difference of vitamin content initial fruits pulp. Johnson et al. [62] reported that vitamine C content in pumpkin pulp 15.25 mg 100 g−1 while Nwofia et al. [63] reported that vitamin C content in papaya pulp ranged from 36.37 to 43.41 mg 100 g−1. Comparing between mean of total storage period the results indicated that maximum vitamin C content was 21.21 ± 2.96 mg 100 g−1 at zero time while deceased to 6.01 ± 0.50 mg 100 g−1 at 12 month storage. These results are in agreement with [50] [64] reported that vitamin C decreased in low calorie jam during storage. The loss of vitamin C in the initial stages is because of the presence of

Vitamin C (mg 100 g<sup>−1</sup> fw) content of orange-based formulated low calories jams sweetened with fructose, stevioside and sucralose during 12 months of storage (mean ± SD)
Fruit typeSweetener formulaStorage period (month)Mean of storage periodMean of fruit type
036912
OrangeO114.91 ± 0.0614.65 ± 0.179.71 ± 0.9211.27 ± 0.396.93 ± 0.311.49 ± 0.99bc11.42 ± 1.03b
O214.35 ± 0.1614.56 ± 0.1412.48 ± 0.4410.75 ± 0.244.85 ± 0.3611.40 ± 1.11bc
O316.55 ± 0.2616.12 ± 0.3411.79 ± 0.3211.96 ± 0.35.2 ± 0.4612.32 ± 1.23c
O411.37 ± 0.1411.22 ± 0.2611.96 ± 0.311.27 ± 0.396.41 ± 0.1210.44 ± 0.69b
75% orange/ 25% pumpkinO511.35 ± 0.0610.93 ± 0.117.63 ± 0.477.63 ± 0.477.45 ± 0.489.00 ± 0.67a9.59 ± 1.03a
O613.26 ± 0.3613.35 ± 0.3610.4 ± 0.439.19 ± 0.65.03 ± 0.3510.24 ± 1.06ab
O714.04 ± 0.4214.65 ± 0.498.49 ± 0.278.84 ± 0.354.85 ± 0.3610.17 ± 1.24ab
O813.15 ± 0.1811.61 ± 0.257.97 ± 0.465.2 ± 0.236.76 ± 0.48.94 ± 1.07a
75% orange/ 25% papayaO920.19 ± 0.1619.87 ± 0.1217.68 ± 0.336.76 ± 0.26.59 ± 0.3114.22 ± 1.72d22.04 ± 3.51c
O1029.21 ± 0.2528.51 ± 0.3715.43 ± 0.210.4 ± 0.165.37 ± 0.3417.78 ± 2.37e
O1157.37 ± 0.156.33 ± 0.2813.17 ± 0.311.79 ± 0.235.2 ± 0.2328.77 ± 4.46f
O1238.75 ± 0.1336.55 ± 0.2544.03 ± 1.210.05 ± 0.257.45 ± 0.2927.37 ± 3.11g
Mean of total storage period21.21 ± 2.96D20.70 ± 2.91D14.23 ± 2.60C9.59 ± 0.73B6.01 ± 0.50A
Ratio of (fructose:sweeteners)O (1,5,9) (100/0)O (2,6,10) (75/25)O (3,7,11) (50/50)O (4,8,12) (25/75)
Mean of sweetener formula11.57 ± 1.41A13.14 ± 1.97B17.09 ± 3.93D15.58 ± 3.21C
LSD at 0.05 for:Storage (S)Fruit (F)Sweetener (T)S*FS*TF*TS*F*T
0.700.630.631.211.401.092.43

a, b & c: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means, within the same column have the same superscript letter. n = 3. A, B & C: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means for the same attribute within the same row have the same superscript letter.

oxygen in the headspace or this could due to oxidation or degradation of the thermolabile ascorbic acid into dehydrate ascorbic acid upon storage [64] . Comparing between mean of sweetener formula the results indicated that highest vitamin C content was 17.09 ± 3.93 mg 100 g−1 in ratio of (50:50) while lowest vitamin C content was 11.57 ± 1.41 mg 100 g−1 in ratio of (100:0).

The mean of TSS was ranged from 31.98 ± 1.15 to 34.13 ± 1.19 [Brix] in OK and Orange jams, respectively (Table 7). Significant difference between OK and (orange and OY) jams was found. Comparing between mean of storage period the results indicated that TSS ranged from a low of 22.53 ± 0.05 in O8 to a high of 43.37 ± 0.13 in O1. Comparing between mean of total storage period the results indicated that TSS was almost stable and no trend could be observed even a slight increases was recorded at the end of storage period. These results are in agreement with the results of [65] - [67] who observed minor increase in TSS of strawberry and watermelon lemon jams during storage. The increase in TSS contents of the product may be due to acid hydrolysis of polysaccharides especially gums and pectin into simple sugars [68] . Comparing between mean of sweetener formula a logical significant differences was observed with increasing the replacement level of fructose.

3.4. Organoleptical Parameters of Orange-Based Jams

Twelve low calorie orange-based formulated jams were prepared mainly from orange, pumpkin and papaya then sweetened using F, St and Su as mentioned in materials and methods in Table 1, data were illustrated in Tables 8-12. Color, taste, odor, texture, and bitterness of prepared jams were organoleptically evaluated. The effect of fructose replacement by (St & Su) on sensory attributes was investigated as well.

The obtained data in Table 8 indicated that no significant difference (P < 0.05) was found in color scores between prepared OK and OY or orange jams. These findings are in agreements with [69] . Also Abdullah et al.

Total soluble solids (Brix) of orange-based formulated low calories jams sweetened with fructose, stevioside and sucralose during 12 months of storage (mean ± SD)
Fruit typeSweetener formulaStorage period (month)Mean of storage periodMean of fruit type
036912
OrangeO144.27 ± 0.0244.27 ± 0.0243.4 ± 0.0342.37 ± 0.0842.53 ± 0.0643.37 ± 0.13k34.13 ± 1.19b
O237.73 ± 0.0337.73 ± 0.0336.2 ± 0.0236.43 ± 0.0736.7 ± 0.0336.96 ± 0.12g
O331.97 ± 0.0532.23 ± 0.0231.27 ± 0.0531.33 ± 0.0530.7 ± 0.0431.50 ± 0.11e
O424.53 ± 0.0124.53 ± 0.0125.03 ± 0.0125 ± 0.0224.43 ± 0.0424.71 ± 0.06b
75% orange/ 25% pumpkinO539.6 ± 0.0339.6 ± 0.0339.2 ± 0.0339.6 ± 0.0239.4 ± 0.0439.48 ± 0.04i31.98 ± 1.15a
O636.63 ± 0.0136.63 ± 0.0135.3 ± 0.0535.3 ± 0.0535.6 ± 0.0335.89 ± 0.11f
O728.17 ± 0.0330.63 ± 0.0530.3 ± 0.0230.5 ± 0.0730.5 ± 0.0530.02 ± 0.18d
O822.63 ± 0.0522.63 ± 0.0522.27 ± 0.0522.57 ± 0.0222.53 ± 0.0822.53 ± 0.05a
75% orange/ 25% papayaO942.3 ± 0.0342.3 ± 0.0341.13 ± 0.0240.37 ± 0.1741.47 ± 0.0241.51 ± 0.14j34.06 ± 1.07b
O1035.87 ± 0.0838.53 ± 0.0437.63 ± 0.0238.6 ± 0.0337.53 ± 0.0537.63 ± 0.17h
O1130.2 ± 0.0232.53 ± 0.0231.13 ± 0.0332.5 ± 0.0532.4 ± 0.0531.75 ± 0.17e
O1224.27 ± 0.0325.9 ± 0.0425.17 ± 0.0325.57 ± 0.0825.7 ± 0.0225.32 ± 0.13c
Mean of total storage period33.18 ± 1.23A33.96 ± 1.18C33.17 ± 1.14A33.34 ± 1.1B33.29 ± 1.13AB
Ratio of (fructose:sweeteners)O (1,5,9) (100/0)O (2,6,10) (75/25)O (3,7,11) (50/50)O (4,8,12) (25/75)
Mean of sweetener formula41.45 ± 0.27D36.83 ± 0.18C31.09 ± 0.21B24.18 ± 0.26A
LSD at 0.05 for:Storage (S)Fruit (F)Sweetener (T)S*FS*TF*TS*F*T
0.130.110.110.220.250.190.43

a, b & c: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means, within the same column have the same superscript letter. n = 3. A, B & C: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means for the same attribute within the same row have the same superscript letter.

Color of orange-based formulated low calories jams sweetened with fructose, stevioside and sucralose during 12 months of storage (mean ± SD)
Fruit typeSweetener formulaStorage period (month)Mean of storage periodMean of fruit type
036912
OrangeO15.08 ± 0.895 ± 1.112.3 ± 1.22.6 ± 1.222.55 ± 1.133.51 ± 1.67bO3.45 ± 1.53a
O25.1 ± 0.634.3 ± 1.113.1 ± 1.062.03 ± 0.642.08 ± 0.673.35 ± 1.48b
O34.7 ± 0.724.6 ± 1.373 ± 1.22.1 ± 0.842.05 ± 0.753.29 ± 1.54b
O44.85 ± 1.164.9 ± 0.963 ± 1.22.8 ± 0.882.75 ± 0.843.65 ± 1.42Od
75% orange/ 25% pumpkinO55.35 ± 1.255.2 ± 0.992.8 ± 1.092.9 ± 1.152.9 ± 1.13.83 ± 1.62df3.81 ± 1.57b
O65.41 ± 0.794.6 ± 1.32.9 ± 1.062.6 ± 1.032.6 ± 0.983.61 ± 1.56O
O75.58 ± 0.875.2 ± 1.093.2 ± 0.992.8 ± 1.092.78 ± 1.053.91 ± 1.59f
O85.28 ± 0.995 ± 1.013.6 ± 1.32.8 ± 1.092.8 ± 1.073.90 ± 1.52f
75% orange/ 25% papayaO94.68 ± 1.143.7 ± 1.112.5 ± 1.222.1 ± 1.152.13 ± 1.143.02 ± 1.53a3.56 ± 1.53a
O104.98 ± 1.074.2 ± 1.092.8 ± 0.882.4 ± 1.032.38 ± 1.033.35 ± 1.46b
O115.18 ± 1.155 ± 1.283.5 ± 1.33 ± 1.282.98 ± 1.273.93 ± 1.58f
O124.65 ± 1.214.5 ± 1.523.9 ± 1.393.3 ± 0.913.25 ± 0.953.92 ± 1.34f
Mean of total storage period5.07 ± 1.04D4.68 ± 1.24O3.05 ± 1.23B2.62 ± 1.10A2.6 ± 1.07A
Ratio of (fructose:sweeteners)O (1,5,9) (100/0)O (2,6,10) (75/25)O (3,7,11) (50/50)O (4,8,12) (25/75)
Mean of sweetener formula3.45 ± 1.64A3.44 ± 1.5A3.71 ± 1.59B3.82 ± 1.43B
LSD at 0.05 for:Storage (S)Fruit (F)Sweetener (T)S*FS*TF*TS*F*T
0.140.120.110.240.270.210.47

a, b & O: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means, within the same column have the same superscript letter. n = 40. A, B & O: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means for the same attribute within the same row have the same superscript letter.

Taste of orange-based formulated low calories jams sweetened with fructose, stevioside and sucralose during 12 months of storage (mean ± SD)
Fruit typeSweetener formulaStorage period (month)Mean of storage periodMean of fruit type
036912
OrangeO14.9 ± 1.034.7 ± 1.114.1 ± 0.712.9 ± 0.962.93 ± 0.943.91 ± 1.28fgh3.76 ± 1.29b
O25.4 ± 0.844.6 ± 1.584.1 ± 0.842.89 ± 0.692.95 ± 0.664.01 ± 1.37h
O34.9 ± 0.874.5 ± 1.133.9 ± 0.552.6 ± 0.672.65 ± 0.73.71 ± 1.24Odf
O44.33 ± 1.033.9 ± 1.463.6 ± 0.932.6 ± 0.672.63 ± 0.673.41 ± 1.21ab
75% orange/ 25% pumpkinO54.78 ± 1.075.1 ± 1.323.4 ± 1.373.2 ± 0.763.23 ± 0.73.94 ± 1.35gh3.86 ± 1.35c
O65.21 ± 0.574.2 ± 1.263.8 ± 0.882.8 ± 0.992.85 ± 0.983.76 ± 1.31dfg
O75.55 ± 1.044.6 ± 1.133.6 ± 0.813.2 ± 0.763.15 ± 0.774.02 ± 1.30h
O84.75 ± 1.784.6 ± 1.373.7 ± 1.112.8 ± 0.612.8 ± 0.613.73 ± 1.44df
75% orange/ 25% papayaO94.34 ± 1.174 ± 1.113.2 ± 1.092.6 ± 1.032.65 ± 13.35 ± 1.28a3.54 ± 1.26a
O104.38 ± 1.294.1 ± 1.663.9 ± 0.842.7 ± 0.792.78 ± 0.733.57 ± 1.31bOd
O114.63 ± 1.254.2 ± 1.343.6 ± 0.813.1 ± 1.153.1 ± 1.083.73 ± 1.28df
O123.58 ± 1.24.4 ± 1.133.6 ± 0.673 ± 1.013 ± 0.963.52 ± 1.13abO
Mean of total storage period4.73 ± 1.23D4.41 ± 1.34O3.71 ± 0.94B2.87 ± 0.88A2.89 ± 0.84A
Ratio of (fructose:sweeteners)O (1,5,9) (100/0)O (2,6,10) (75/25)O (3,7,11) (50/50)O (4,8,12) (25/75)
Mean of sweetener formula3.73 ± 1.33B3.78 ± 1.34B3.82 ± 1.28B3.55 ± 1.27A
LSD at 0.05 for:Storage (S)Fruit (F)Sweetener (T)S*FS*TF*TS*F*T
0.130.120.100.220.260.200.45

a, b & O: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means, within the same column have the same superscript letter. n = 40. A, B & O: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means for the same attribute within the same row have the same superscript letter.

Odor of orange-based formulated low calories jams sweetened with fructose, stevioside and sucralose during 12 months of storage (mean ± SD)
Fruit typeSweetener formulaStorage period (month)Mean of storage periodMean of fruit type
036912
OrangeO15.33 ± 0.924.70 ± 1.514.3 ± 1.023.40 ± 0.933.43 ± 0.934.23 ± 1.31d3.91 ± 1.26b
O25.00 ± 0.994.60 ± 1.374.1 ± 1.063.00 ± 0.773.00 ± 0.773.96 ± 1.30O
O34.78 ± 1.144.20 ± 1.184.3 ± 1.113.10 ± 0.713.08 ± 0.733.89 ± 1.20O
O44.44 ± 0.753.90 ± 1.464 ± 0.642.70 ± 0.652.70 ± 0.653.54 ± 1.14b
75% orange/ 25% pumpkinO54.70 ± 1.144.70 ± 1.363.2 ± 1.263.40 ± 0.933.43 ± 0.933.89 ± 1.31O3.87 ± 1.31b
O64.95 ± 1.024.60 ± 1.523.7 ± 1.023.20 ± 1.093.20 ± 1.093.92 ± 1.36O
O75.03 ± 1.074.30 ± 1.643.8 ± 0.883.30 ± 0.463.25 ± 0.543.94 ± 1.20O
O84.73 ± 1.454.50 ± 1.303.8 ± 1.262.90 ± 0.712.85 ± 0.703.76 ± 1.37O
75% orange/ 25% papayaO93.95 ± 1.144.10 ± 1.463.1 ± 0.963.00 ± 1.013.00 ± 0.963.42 ± 1.21ab3.43 ± 1.24a
O103.58 ± 1.284.40 ± 1.223.6 ± 1.652.90 ± 1.152.90 ± 1.103.48 ± 1.40ab
O114.03 ± 1.074.00 ± 1.433.5 ± 1.523.00 ± 0.643.00 ± 0.643.51 ± 1.20ab
O123.43 ± 1.304.40 ± 1.133.4 ± 0.672.70 ± 0.792.65 ± 0.743.32 ± 1.14a
Mean of total storage period4.49 ± 1.25O4.37 ± 1.4O3.73 ± 1.18B3.05 ± 0.86A3.04 ± 0.86A
Ratio of (fructose:sweeteners)O (1,5,9) (100/0)O (2,6,10) (75/25)O (3,7,11) (50/50)O (4,8,12) (25/75)
Mean of sweetener formula3.85 ± 1.32B3.78 ± 1.37B3.78 ± 1.22B3.54 ± 1.23A
LSD at 0.05 for:Storage (S)Fruit (F)Sweetener (T)S*FS*TF*TS*F*T
0.140.120.110.240.270.210.47

a, b & O: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means, within the same column have the same superscript letter. n = 40. A, B & O: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means for the same attribute within the same row have the same superscript letter.

Texture of orange-based formulated low calories jams sweetened with fructose, stevioside and sucralose during 12 months of storage (mean ± SD)
Fruit typeSweetener formulaStorage period (month)Mean of storage periodMean of fruit type
036912
OrangeO14.88 ± 1.514 ± 1.633.9 ± 1.394.1 ± 0.964.08 ± 0.974.19 ± 1.35Ode4.16 ± 1.33b
O25.28 ± 0.964.4 ± 1.934 ± 0.783.68 ± 1.323.74 ± 1.354.23 ± 1.44de
O34.95 ± 1.434.3 ± 1.814.3 ± 0.793.9 ± 0.963.9 ± 0.964.27 ± 1.29de
O44.62 ± 1.414.7 ± 1.364.2 ± 0.613.1 ± 0.553.1 ± 0.553.94 ± 1.20b
75% orange/ 25% pumpkinO55 ± 1.345.1 ± 1.533.6 ± 0.674 ± 1.284 ± 1.244.34 ± 1.37de4.41 ± 1.34c
O65.51 ± 1.214.6 ± 1.823.8 ± 0.883.9 ± 0.963.8 ± 1.044.32 ± 1.39de
O75.75 ± 1.014.8 ± 1.684.2 ± 0.764.2 ± 0.884.08 ± 14.61 ± 1.27f
O84.93 ± 1.624.9 ± 1.844.1 ± 0.844 ± 0.783.95 ± 0.854.38 ± 1.33ef
75% orange/ 25% papayaO95.03 ± 1.284.6 ± 1.34 ± 0.783.5 ± 0.933.45 ± 1.014.11 ± 1.23bOd3.98 ± 1.40a
O104.83 ± 0.984.4 ± 1.824.2 ± 0.763.7 ± 1.023.65 ± 1.084.16 ± 1.26bOde
O114.95 ± 1.184.7 ± 1.763.5 ± 1.223.4 ± 1.223.35 ± 1.233.98 ± 1.50bO
O124.45 ± 1.933.7 ± 1.873 ± 1.53.6 ± 0.933.58 ± 0.963.67 ± 1.56a
Mean of total storage period5.01 ± 1.38D4.52 ± 1.73O3.9 ± 1.01B3.76 ± 1.04AB3.72 ± 1.07A
Ratio of (fructose:sweeteners)O (1,5,9) (100/0)O (2,6,10) (75/25)O (3,7,11) (50/50)O (4,8,12) (25/75)
Mean of sweetener formula4.21 ± 1.32B4.23 ± 1.36B4.29 ± 1.38B3.99 ± 1.40A
LSD at 0.05 for:Storage (S)Fruit (F)Sweetener (T)S*FS*TF*TS*F*T
0.160.140.120.270.310.240.55

a, b & O: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means, within the same column have the same superscript letter. n = 40. A, B & O: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means for the same attribute within the same row have the same superscript letter.

Bitterness of orange-based formulated low calories jams sweetened with fructose, stevioside and sucralose during 12 months of storage (mean ± SD)
Fruit typeSweetener formulaStorage period (month)Mean of storage periodMean of fruit type
036912
OrangeO15.23 ± 1.195.2 ± 0.883.9 ± 1.063.1 ± 0.843.08 ± 0.834.10 ± 1.36bO4.02 ± 1.34a
O25.13 ± 1.35 ± 1.24.3 ± 0.652.76 ± 1.12.92 ± 1.244.05 ± 1.50bO
O35.03 ± 1.14.9 ± 1.064.1 ± 0.713.2 ± 0.883.2 ± 0.944.09 ± 1.23bO
O44.49 ± 1.325.1 ± 1.243.2 ± 1.093.2 ± 0.413.23 ± 0.533.84 ± 1.27a
75% orange/ 25% pumpkinO55.35 ± 1.254.7 ± 1.293.7 ± 1.23.6 ± 1.033.6 ± 1.014.19 ± 1.35bOd4.29 ± 1.36c
O65.62 ± 0.915.3 ± 0.794.5 ± 0.823.1 ± 0.843.2 ± 0.944.34 ± 1.35de
O75.63 ± 0.875 ± 1.114.5 ± 0.823.6 ± 1.133.6 ± 1.154.47 ± 1.29e
O85.58 ± 0.845.2 ± 1.493.7 ± 0.913.2 ± 0.883.25 ± 0.934.19 ± 1.44bOd
75% orange/ 25% papayaO95.05 ± 1.214.9 ± 1.243.9 ± 1.153.3 ± 0.913.33 ± 0.894.09 ± 1.31bO4.14 ± 1.34b
O105.63 ± 0.634.8 ± 0.994.7 ± 1.023 ± 0.913.05 ± 0.94.24 ± 1.37Od
O115.6 ± 0.785 ± 1.23.9 ± 1.063.3 ± 0.913.3 ± 0.944.22 ± 1.35bOd
O125.15 ± 1.15 ± 1.23.7 ± 0.793.1 ± 0.963.15 ± 0.984.02 ± 1.34ab
Mean of total storage period5.29 ± 1.10D5.01 ± 1.15O4.01 ± 1.03B3.21 ± 0.93A3.24 ± 0.96A
Ratio of (fructose:sweeteners)O (1,5,9) (100/0)O (2,6,10) (75/25)O (3,7,11) (50/50)O (4,8,12) (25/75)
Mean of sweetener formula4.13 ± 1.34AB4.21 ± 1.41BC4.26 ± 1.3C4.02 ± 1.36A
LSD at 0.05 for:Storage (S)Fruit (F)Sweetener (T)S*FS*TF*TS*F*T
0.130.110.100.220.260.200.44

a, b & O: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means, within the same column have the same superscript letter. n = 40. A, B & O: There is no significant difference (P > 0.05) between any two means for the same attribute within the same row have the same superscript letter.

[35] showed that formulations containing 3.7% to 37.7% papaya in mixed fruit jam produced optimum acceptance for color. A decremental rate in color was monitored during 12 months. This result was in accordance with Ehsan et al. [70] who reported decrease in color during storage of grape fruit apple marmalade. Replacing fructose by St & Su improved the color significantly. This result was in agreement with Youssef et al. [32] . Also, Carvalho et al. [71] showed that used of Reb-A as a sweetener in strawberry diet jam was given a bitter sensory performance.

The obtained data in Table 9 indicated that the highest score was recorded for OK jams (3.86 ± 1.35) followed by orange jams (3.76 ± 1.29) while OY jams recorded the lowest score (3.54 ± 1.26), significantly. During the storage, the jams taste was deteriorated significantly. This result was in agreement with Bajwa et al. [72] . Concerning the mean of sweetener formulas, results indicated that maximum mean score was 3.82 ± 1.28 obtained by ratio of (50:50). These results were in agreement with Kerdsup et al. [73] and Gajar et al. [74] .

Oder of formulated low caloric jams was tabulated in Table 10. The obtained data indicated that no significant (P < 0.05) difference was found between OK and orange jam while a significant differences between them and OY and both OK and orange jams was recorded. Replacing the fructose with St & Su did not affect the odor even at 50%. As shown in other sensory attributes the odor also deteriorated with prolong of storage period. The replacing of 75% of fructose affect the odor may be due to the effect of cooking temperature on flavor substances which affecting the odor. These results are in harmony with Gajar et al. [74] and Carvalho et al. [71] .

In Table 11, there is a significant difference (P < 0.05) was found among all formulated orange jams. After one year storage, results concluded that OK jam formulas was the better than orange or OY jams. These results are in accordance with confirmed results by [52] . A decremental rate in jam texture was correlated to increasing of storage period. This result is agreement with Ehsan et al. [70] whom recorded a decrease in texture from 8.80 to 7.96 in grape fruit apple marmalade during storage. Also, Muhammad et al. [75] reported that the mean score for texture significantly decreased from 9.00 to 6.7 during storage in apple diet jam. Regarding the general mean of sweetener formulas the results indicated no significant differences between the ratios (100:0), (75:25), and (50:50) while there is a significant difference between ratio (25:75) and all replacing ratios confirming the texture degradation in low fructose jams [52] [75] .

The Bitterness characteristic of sweetened jam with fructose, St and Su was illustrated in Table 12. Comparing the fruits used in jam making a significant difference (P < 0.05) was observed among the group formulas recorded the lowest bitterness as high scored for OY jams while the lowest score was given to orange as highest bitterness was recorded. During the storage period, an incremental rate in bitterness was observed when monitoring the mean of total storage period. Comparing between mean of sweetener formulas the results indicated that maximum mean score for bitterness was 4.26 ± 1.3 obtained by ratio (50:50). A non-significant difference was observed between different sweetened jams; means that addition of different Su and St for producing diet jams don not affect the taste. These results are in agreement with Khouryieh et al. [76] and Prakash et al. [77] .

4. Conclusion

The use of sweeteners such as fructose, sucralose and stevioside in the manufacture of orange diet jam was shown to be satisfactory, resulting in a product with jam characteristics and with flavor, taste and texture similar to conventional jam, with low caloric value, allowing its indication as much for diabetics as to the individuals that are on a diet with caloric restriction. This type of product can be recommended as an antioxidant booster for the consumers in health point of view. The product can be safely consumed up to a period of 12 months without any deterioration in its quality at room temperature condition.

Cite this paper

Rafeek M.Abolila,HassanBarakat,Hassan A.El-Tanahy,Hamdy A.El-Mansy, (2015) Chemical, Nutritional and Organoleptical Characteristics of Orange-Based Formulated Low-Calorie Jams. Food and Nutrition Sciences,06,1229-1244. doi: 10.4236/fns.2015.613129

NOTESReferencesWeaver, D. and Finke, M. (2003) The Relationship between the Use of Sugar Content Information on Nutrition Labels and the Consumption of Added Sugars. Food Policy, 28, 213-219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0306-9192(03)00028-9Dietz, W.H., Benken, D.E. and Hunter, A.S. (2009) Public Health Law and the Prevention and Control of Obesity. Milbank Quarterly, 87, 215-227. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00553.xSilver, L. and Bassett, M.T. (2008) Food Safety for the 21st Century. JAMA, 300, 957-959. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.300.8.957Brownell, K.D., Schwartz, M.B., Puhl, R.M., Henderson, K.E. and Harris, J.L. (2009) The Need for Bold Action to Prevent Adolescent Obesity. Journal of Adolescent Health, 45, S8-S17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2009.03.004Dabelea, D., Bell, R.A., D’Agostino Jr, R.B., Imperatore, G., Johansen, J.M., Linder, B., Liu, L.L., Loots, B., Marcovina, S. and Mayer-Davis, E.J. (2007) Incidence of Diabetes in Youth in the United States. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 297, 2716-2724. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.297.24.2716Ogden, C.L., Carroll, M.D., Curtin, L.R., McDowell, M.A., Tabak, C.J. and Flegal, K.M. (2006) Prevalence of Overweight and Obesity in the United States, 1999-2004. JAMA, 295, 1549-1555. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.13.1549Cardoso, J.M.P. and Bolini, H.M.A. (2007) Different Sweeteners in Peach Nectar: Ideal and Equivalent Sweetness. Food Research International, 40, 1249-1253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2007.08.004Pinheiro, M., Oliveira, M., Penna, A. and Tamime, A. (2005) The Effect of Different Sweeteners in Low-Calorie Yogurts—A Review. International Journal of Dairy Technology, 58, 193-199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0307.2005.00228.xFernandes, F.A., Gall?o, M.I. and Rodrigues, S. (2008) Effect of Osmotic Dehydration and Ultrasound Pre-Treatment on Cell Structure: Melon Dehydration. LWT-Food Science and Technology, 41, 604-610. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2007.05.007 Wiebe, N., Padwal, R., Field, C., Marks, S., Jacobs, R. and Tonelli, M. (2011) A Systematic Review on the Effect of Sweeteners on Glycemic Response and Clinically Relevant Outcomes. BMC Medicine, 9, 123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-9-123Mattes, R.D. and Popkin, B.M. (2009) Nonnutritive Sweetener Consumption in Humans: Effects on Appetite and Food Intake and Their Putative Mechanisms. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 89, 1-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.2008.26792Fitch, C. and Keim, K.S. (2012) Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: Use of Nutritive and Nonnutritive Sweeteners. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 112, 739-758. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2012.03.009UK, D. (2012) Number of People Diagnosed with Diabetes Reaches Three Million.Bellisle, F. and Drewnowski, A. (2007) Intense Sweeteners, Energy Intake and the Control of Body Weight. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 61, 691-700. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602649BSDA (2013) Vitamins and Minerals.Binns, N.M. (2003) Sucralose—All Sweetness and Light. Nutrition Bulletin, 28, 53-58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-3010.2003.00307.xde Arruda, J.G.F., Martins, A.T. and Azoubel, R. (2003) Ciclamato de s&oacute;dio e rim fetal. Revista Brasileira de Saúde Materno Infantil, 3, 147-150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s1519-38292003000200003Portela, G. and Azoubel, R. (2004) Nefrotoxicidade fetal com o uso da amicacina. Estudo cariométrico. Jornal Brasileiro de Nefrologia, 26, 12-18.Martins, A.T., Azoubel, R., Lopes, R.A., di Matteo, M.A.S. and de Arruda, J.G.F. (2005) Efectos del ciclamato de s&oacute;dio en el h&iacute;gado fetal de ratas: estudios cariométrico y estereol&oacute;gico. International Journal of Morphology, 23, 221-226.de Matos, M.A., Martins, A.T. and Azoubel, R. (2006) Efectos del ciclamato de sodio en la placenta de rata: Estudio morfométrico. International Journal of Morphology, 24, 137-142. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95022006000300001Fetal H. ,et al. (2007)Effects of Aspartame on Maternal-Fetal and Placental Weights, Length of Umbilical Cord and Fetal Liver: A Kariometric Experimental Study International Journal of Morphology 25, 549-554.Lemus-Mondaca, R., Vega-G&aacute;lvez, A., Zura-Bravo, L. and Ah-Hen, K. (2012) Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni, Source of a High-Potency Natural Sweetener: A Comprehensive Review on the Biochemical, Nutritional and Functional Aspects. Food Chemistry, 132, 1121-1132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.11.140Shah, A.B., Jones, G.P. and Vasiljevic, T. (2010) Sucrose-Free Chocolate Sweetened with Stevia rebaudiana Extract and Containing Different Bulking Agents—Effects on Physicochemical and Sensory Properties. International Journal of Food Science & Technology, 45, 1426-1435. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2010.02283.xJFECFA (2004) Sixty-Third Meeting. WHO, Geneva.Ghanta, S., Banerjee, A., Poddar, A. and Chattopadhyay, S. (2007) Oxidative DNA Damage Preventive Activity and Antioxidant Potential of Stevia rebaudiana (Bertoni) Bertoni, a Natural Sweetener. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 55, 10962-10967. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jf071892qMuhammad, A., Durrani, Y., Zeb, A., Ayub, M. and Ullah, J. (2008) Development of Diet Jam from Apple Grown in Swat (NWFP). Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 24, 461-467.Kopjar, M., Pilizota, V., Tiban, N.N., Subaric, D., Babic, J., Ackar, D. and Sajdl, M. (2009) Strawberry Jams: Influence of Different Pectins on Colour and Textural Properties. Czech Journal of Food Sciences, 27, 20-28.Tamer, C.E., Incedayi, B., Y?nel, S.P., Yonak, S. and Copur, O.U. (2010) Evaluation of Several Quality Criteria of Low Calorie Pumpkin Dessert. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca, 38, 76-80. Basu, S., Shivhare, U., Singh, T. and Beniwal, V. (2011) Rheological, Textural and Spectral Characteristics of Sorbitol Substituted Mango Jam. Journal of Food Engineering, 105, 503-512. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2011.03.014Gao, X., Yu, T., Zhang, Z.-H., Xu, J.-C. and Fu, X.-T. (2011) Rheological and Sensory Properties of Four Kinds of Jams. Journal of Stored Products and Postharvest Research, 2, 227-234.Kerdsup, P. and Naknean, P. (2013) Effect of Sorbitol Substitution on Physical, Chemical and Sensory Properties of Low Sugar Mango Jam. International Scientific Proceedings, 13, 12-18.Youssef, H.M. and Mousa, R.M. (2012) Nutritional Assessment of Low-Calorie Baladi Rose Petals Jam. Food and Public Health, 2, 197-201.Teangpook, C. and Paosantong, U. (2013) Production and Shelf-Life of Low Sucrose Lime Juice Papaya Jam. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 12, 870-878. http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/pjn.2013.870.878Levaj, B., Dragovic-Uzelac, V., Dancevic, T., Liber, S., Repajic, M. and Bursac Kovacevic, D. (2009) Quality of Clementine Jam Influenced by Purée Pretreatment, Sugar Type and Pectin Addition. Agriculturae Conspectus Scientificus (ACS), 74, 227-231.Abdullah, A. and Cheng, T.C. (2001) Optimization of Reduced Calorie Tropical Mixed Fruits Jam. Food Quality and Preference, 12, 63-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(00)00030-6AOAC (2005) Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International. 18th Edition, AOAC International, Gaithersburg.Wettestein, D.V. (1957) Chlorophyll-letale und der submikroskopische Formwechsel der Plastiden. Experimental Cell Research, 12, 427-506. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0014-4827(57)90165-9Ough, C.S. and Amerine, M.A. (1988) Methods for Analysis of Musts and Wines. Wiley-Interscience, New York, 377 p.Zhang, D. and Hamauzu, Y. (2004) Phenolics, Ascorbic Acid, Carotenoids and Antioxidant Activity of Broccoli and Their Changes during Conventional and Microwave Cooking. Food Chemistry, 88, 503-509. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2004.01.065Wilson, C.D., Pace, E., Bromfield, G., Jones, J.Y. and Lu, J.Y. (1998) Consumer Acceptance of Vegetarian Sweet Potato Products Intended for Space Missions. Life Support & Biosphere Science, 5, 339-345.Steel, R., Torrie, J. and Dickey, D. (1997) Principles and Procedures of Statistics: A Biometrical Approach. 3rd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York.Salvador, A.C., Dantas, M.I. de S., Vasconcelos, C.M., Vanetti, M.C.D., Ribeiro, S.M.R., Nery-Enes, B., Nelson, J.D. and Martino, H.S.D. (2012) Development of a Low Calorie Yacon Jam: Physico Chemical, Microbiological and Sensory Characterization. Revista chilena de nutrici&oacute;n, 39, 72-77.Mahan, L.K. and Alimentos, E.S.S. (2005) Nutri??o e dietoterapia. Roca, S?o Paulo, 341-356. Yuyama, L.K.O., Pantoja, L., Maeda, R.N., Aguiar, J.P.L. and da Silva, S.B. (2008) Development and Acceptability of a Low Calorie Cubiu (Solanum sessiliflorum Dunal) Jam. Food Science and Technology (Campinas), 28, 929-934. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0101-20612008000400026Chatsudthipong, V. and Muanprasat, C. (2009) Stevioside and Related Compounds: Therapeutic Benefits beyond Sweetness. Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 121, 41-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pharmthera.2008.09.007Thompson, J., Drake, M., Lopetcharat, K. and Yates, M. (2004) Preference Mapping of Commercial Chocolate Milks. Journal of Food Science, 69, S406-S413. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2004.tb09958.xLe, K., Chiu, F. and Ng, K. (2007) Identification and Quantification of Antioxidants in Fructus lycii. Food Chemistry, 105, 353-363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2006.11.063Istratii, D., Vizireanu, C., Iordachescu, G., Dima, F. and Garnai, M. (2013) Physico-Chemical Characteristics and Antioxidant Activity of Goji Fruits Jam and Jelly during Storage. Annals of the University Dunarea de Jos of Galati Fascicle VI—Food Technology, 37, 100-110.Corrêa, R.C., Haminiuk, C.W., Sora, G.T., Bergamasco, R. and Vieira, A. (2014) Antioxidant and Rheological Properties of Guava Jam with Added Concentrated Grape Juice. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 94, 146-152. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.6233Poiana, M.-A., Alexa, E. and Mateescu, C. (2012) Tracking Antioxidant Properties and Color Changes in Low-Sugar Bilberry Jam as Effect of Processing, Storage and Pectin Concentration. Chemistry Central Journal, 6.Rababah, T.M., Al-U’Datt, M., Al-Mahasneh, M., Yang, W., Feng, H., Ereifej, K., Kilani, I. and Ishmais, M.A. (2014) Effect of Jam Processing and Storage on Phytochemicals and Physiochemical Properties of Cherry at Different Temperatures. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation, 38, 247-254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.6233Kopjar, M., Pilizota, V., Tiban, N.N., Subaric, D., Babic, J., Ackar, D. and Sajdl, M. (2009) Strawberry Jams: Influence of Different Pectins on Color and Textural Properties. Czech Journal of Food Sciences, 27, 20-28.Shukla, S., Mehta, A., Bajpai, V.K. and Shukla, S. (2009) In Vitro Antioxidant Activity and Total Phenolic Content of Ethanolic Leaf Extract of Stevia rebaudiana Bert. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 47, 2338-2343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2009.06.024Tadhani, M., Patel, V. and Subhash, R. (2007) In Vitro Antioxidant Activities of Stevia rebaudiana Leaves and Callus. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 20, 323-329. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2006.08.004Schmidt, B.M., Erdman, J.W. and Lila, M.A. (2005) Effects of Food Processing on Blueberry Antiproliferation and Antioxidant Activity. Journal of Food Science, 70, s389-s394. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2005.tb11461.x?avikin, K., Zdunic, G., Jankovic, T., Tasic, S., Menkovic, N., Stevic, T. and ?or?evic, B. (2009) Phenolic Content and Radical Scavenging Capacity of Berries and Related Jams from Certificated Area in Serbia. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, 64, 212-217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11130-009-0123-2 Scibisz, I. and Mitek, M. (2009) Effect of Processing and Storage Conditions on Phenolic Compounds and Antioxidant Capacity of Highbush Blueberry Jams. Polish Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences, 59, 45-52.Howard, L.R., Castrodale, C., Brownmiller, C. and Mauromoustakos, A. (2010) Jam Processing and Storage Effects on Blueberry Polyphenolics and Antioxidant Capacity. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 58, 4022-4029. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jf902850hKamiloglu, S., Pasli, A.A., Ozcelik, B., Van Camp, J. and Capanoglu, E. (2015) Color Retention, Anthocyanin Stability and Antioxidant Capacity in Black Carrot (Daucus carota) Jams and Marmalades: Effect of Processing, Storage Conditions and in Vitro Gastrointestinal Digestion. Journal of Functional Foods, 13, 1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2014.12.021Kandlakunta, B., Rajendran, A. and Thingnganing, L. (2008) Carotene Content of Some Common (Cereals, Pulses, Vegetables, Spices and Condiments) and Unconventional Sources of Plant Origin. Food Chemistry, 106, 85-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2007.05.071Li, Y. and Schellhorn, H.E. (2007) New Developments and Novel Therapeutic Perspectives for Vitamin C. The Journal of Nutrition, 137, 2171-2184.Johnson, J., Abam, K., Ujong, U., Odey, M., Inekwe, V., Dasofunjo, K. and Inah, G. (2013) Vitamins Composition of Pulp, Seed and Rind of Fresh and Dry Rambutan Nephelium Lappaceum and Squash Cucurbita pepo L. International Journal of Science and Technology, 2, 71-76.Nwofia, G.E., Ojimelukwe, P. and Eji, C. (2012) Chemical Composition of Leaves, Fruit Pulp and Seeds in Some Carica papaya (L) Morphotypes. International Journal of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants, 2, 200-206.Selvamuthukumaran, M. and Khanum, F. (2014) Processing Seabuckthorn Fruit for Antioxidant Rich Jam Development and Shelf Stability Assessment. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge, 13, 335-346.Touati, N., Tarazona-D&iacute;az, M.P., Aguayo, E. and Louaileche, H. (2014) Effect of Storage Time and Temperature on the Physicochemical and Sensory Characteristics of Commercial Apricot Jam. Food Chemistry, 145, 23-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.08.037Safdar, M.N., Mumtaz, A., Hameed, T., Siddiqui, N., Khalil, S. and Amjad, M. (2012) Storage Studies of Jam Prepared from Different Mango Varieties. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 11, 555-561. http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/pjn.2012.653.659Sindumathi, G. and Amutha, S. (2014) Processing and Quality Evaluation of Coconut Based Jam. IOSR Journal of Environmental Science, Toxicology and Food Technology, 8, 10-14. http://dx.doi.org/10.9790/2402-08111014Mehta, U. and Bajaj, S. (1983) Effects of Storage and Methods of Preservation on the Physico-Chemical Characteristics of Citrus Juices. Indian Food Packer, 37, 42-51.Joy K. ,et al. (2013)Formulation, Sensory Evaluation and Nutrient Analysis of Products with Aloe Vera World Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences 2, 5321-5328.Ehsan, E., Naeem, Z., Javed, A. and Nazir, A. (2003) Development, Standardization and Storage Studies on Grape Fruit Apple Marmalade. Pakistan Journal of Food Sciences (Pakistan), 13, 11-15.de Carvalho, A.C.G., de Oliveira, R.C.G., Navacchi, M.F.P., da Costa, C.E.M., Mantovani, D., Dac?me, A.S., Seixas, F.A.V. and da Costa, S.C. (2013) Evaluation of the Potential Use of Rebaudioside-A as Sweetener for Diet Jam. Food Science and Technology (Campinas), 33, 555-560. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0101-20612013005000080 Bajwa, E.E., Parwaz, N.Z. and Ghafoor, A. (2002) Development, Standardization and Storage Studies on Watermelon- Lemon Jam. Pakistan Journal of Food Sciences (Pakistan), 12, 21-24.Kerdsup, P. and Naknean, P. (2013) Effect of Sorbitol Substitution on Physical, Chemical and Sensory Properties of Low Sugar Mango Jam. International Scientific Proceeding, 13, 12-18.Gajar, A.M. and Badrie, N. (2002) Processing and Quality Evaluation of a Low-Calorie Christophene Jam (Sechium edule (Jacq.) Swartz. Journal of Food Science, 67, 341-346. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2002.tb11407.xMuhammad, A., Durrani, Y., Ayub, M., Zeb, A. and Ullah, J. (2009) Organoleptic Evaluation of Diet Apple Jam from Apple Grown in Swat Valley. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 25, 81-86.Khouryieh, H.A., Aramouni, F.M. and Herald, T.J. (2005) Physical, Chemical and Sensory Properties of Sugar-Free Jelly. Journal of Food Quality, 28, 179-190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4557.2005.00014.xPrakash, I., DuBois, G., Clos, J., Wilkens, K. and Fosdick, L. (2008) Development of Rebiana, a Natural, Non-Caloric Sweetener. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 46, S75-S82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2008.05.004